Democracy in Latin America, what can we expect after the CELAC Summit?

By Alejo Romano López -

During the first years of the 21st Century in Latin America, with the increase of the prices of raw materials and thanks to the redistributive policies that were carried out, it seemed that the promises of economic growth of past decades were finally being fulfilled. However, in 2014, with the end of that economic boom and in the absence of accurate political responses, there have been massive protests and considerable migratory flows throughout the region in recent years. Mainly driven by widespread social unrest due to the lack of improvements in the quality of life and due to the effects left behind by COVID-19 (1). For these reasons, given the lack of results from democratic regimes, we have seen how a large segment of the electorate has increasingly begun to prefer worrying forms of authoritarian government, according to data provided by Latinobarómetro (2).

In their most recent text, Mainwaring and Pérez-Liñán (3) argue that the current conditions of democracy in Latin America are the worst since the third wave of democratization, that happened at the end of the 20th Century. This is largely caused by two reasons. First, the presence of powerful actors at the subnational level, including groups that use violence as their main instrument, corrupt police forces, and the increasingly accepted rise of parties with authoritarian ideologies. These limit the proper development of democracy. In this sense we can find examples in most of the countries of the region. Just to mention a few, as is the case in Mexico, the lack of reforms in contexts of constant increases in violence by drug cartels has allowed police officers to use excessive force. Likewise, during 2020 in Brazil, the police committed 6,416 registered homicides, while in the United Kingdom (although with only a quarter of the Brazilian population) only 5 of these murders were committed. In addition, in the year 2022, 67 journalists were murdered in the world, almost half of these occurred in Latin America, thus making it one of the most dangerous regions to carry out this profession (4).

Secondly, the other factor that makes it impossible for States to develop more stable democracies is the lack of confidence and discontent of people about their governments and politics in general. The recent demonstrations in Peru against the new government formed after the removal of Castillo and the attack on January 8 by supporters of Bolsonaro on the Brazilian Congress are a sign of the dissatisfaction of the population with their leaders. For this reason, to the extent that governments cannot generate the necessary consensus within their countries, it will be difficult for them to promote ambitious domestic agendas to achieve structural reforms and thus improve the quality of their institutions and the quality of people's lives.

With Lula's arrival to power in Brazil and the majority presence of left-wing governments in the region, the promise of a second "pink tide" has been raised, as the one that will reverse the trends mentioned in previous paragraphs. However, today the world is very different from the first decade of the century which was marked by relative prosperity on the continent. Furthermore, as Oliver Stuenkel (5) points out, despite this context of ideological coincidence among the main leaders of the region, it is still likely that Latin America will continue to be fragmented. This is due to the fact that various leaders have opposing visions in other aspects of governance and that certain rivalries still persist in the region.

The first test for the relaunch of the integration of the region occurred on January 24 at the meeting of the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC). Undoubtedly, this featured the new Brazilian president who has shown his interest in rebuilding ties on the continent. However, the high social polarization and the challenges presented by the completely divided opposition in his country, added to the absence of his former partners from the first pink tide in the region, will be a barrier to his objectives of bringing Latin American countries closer (6). The CELAC meeting resulted in a joint declaration of the 33 participating countries that highlights their commitment in terms of economic, social and security cooperation. However, the more than 100 points included in the document show us the many challenges to solve and the few priorities, since it was not possible to establish central points on the agenda for the coming years (7). Likewise, the summit between the high leaders left clear differences on their visions about the values that democracy and human rights should represent. For this very reason, to the extent that States cannot formulate a work path materialized in public policies on these central issues for the region, it will be unlikely to expect improvements in the democratic quality of the region.

1. Victoria Murillo – Nueva Sociedad: https://nuso.org/articulo/protestas-descontento-y-democracia-en-america-latina/

2. Facundo Cruz – Cenital: https://cenital.com/el-enojo-con-la-democracia-en-america-latina/

3. Schott Mainwaring & Aníbal Pérez-Liñán: https://www.journalofdemocracy.org/articles/why-latin-americas-democracies-are-stuck/

4. Eric Nagourney – New York Times: https://www.nytimes.com/es/2023/01/24/espanol/periodistas-asesinados-america-latina.html

5. Oliver Stuenkel - Americas Quarterly: https://americasquarterly.org/article/a-second-pink-tide-might-not-unify-latin-america/

6. Carlos Fara: https://www.diariodemocracia.com/opinion/277175-america-latina-mano-lula-celac/ & El País: https://elpais.com/opinion/2023-01-27/impulso-regional-de-lula.html

7. Daviel Zovatto: https://www.ntn24.com/programas/cuestion-de-poder/analisis-sobre-las-conclusiones-de-cumbre-de-la-celac-405736

Photo: Argentine Ministry of Foreign Affairs